myiW Current Conditions and Forecasts Community Forums Buy and Sell Services
 
Hi guest · myAccount · Log in
 SearchSearch   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   RegisterRegister 
Wall Street collapse ... an "Inside Job"?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
coyotewindsurf



Joined: 03 Apr 2006
Posts: 1278
Location: SF Bay

PostPosted: Sat Nov 20, 2010 6:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

feuser wrote:
Wow. Speechless.

I guess you have to consider the source. Wink


_________________
mo
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
isobars



Joined: 12 Dec 1999
Posts: 14635

PostPosted: Sat Nov 20, 2010 6:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

coboardhead wrote:
She'll make it easy for me to decide who to vote for.

I WAS a McCain fan; but she convinced me otherwise.


"She" ... or the ignorant demon the left wing media created from snippets? Her response to Katy Couric's "What do you read?" has been fairly well explained, her leaving her state in the hands of her very competent Lt Gov was an obvious and laudatory no-brainer, and most of the rest of the accusations have been blown completely apart as fabrications. What else do we actually know about her? What I see is a very confident, extremely articulate, well-grounded, thick-skinned, straight-shooting, intelligent, clear-headed, very popular, conservative woman who a) still has two years to learn a great deal about national and global issues and b) scares the living dogshit out of the amoral and/or immoral far left because of just two words: "conservative woman". Why else would the left wing media send literally ten times more "investigative journalists" to Alaska when McCain announced her candidacy than they sent to Illinois when this unknown cool dude -- who's never managed or governed as much as a birthday party for his kids -- so eloquently read his candidacy announcement from a teleprompter?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
coboardhead



Joined: 26 Oct 2009
Posts: 2036

PostPosted: Sat Nov 20, 2010 7:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I guess we'll see, won't we?

I'm gonna have to see more than sound bites and folksy "wisdom" from her before I can agree with any of your assessment of her.

If she can ditch the extremism and start to discuss some middle ground approaches to governing a DIVERSE nation, I could change my mind. If she could start a dialogue of ideas instead of making fun of and deriding the current administration, I could change my mind.

BTW, I don't watch ANY TV news these days, so my opinion is not based on the "liberal" news sources. I look for op eds on line that define her ideology - please direct me to a good one she has written on a political topic. I have to say, her op ed on global warming was nothing more than political gibberish.

She is a celebrity, not a legitimate politician - at least at this time.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
isobars



Joined: 12 Dec 1999
Posts: 14635

PostPosted: Sat Nov 20, 2010 8:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

coboardhead wrote:
her op ed on global warming was nothing more than political gibberish.

She is a celebrity, not a legitimate politician - at least at this time.


I agree with your last sentence, but she undeniably has tremendous national clout.

That other sentence, if it refers to her Cap & Trade op ed in the NYT, really drives home the need for you to start watching some news and reading some books. You literally may as well have said that the TEA Party brought down the World Trade Center, the North Pole landings were faked, and Michael Jackson shot JFK. Not even the most radical left wing pundits I've seen in about a year -- short of Rosie O'Donnell or Jeanine Garafalo -- still think C&T is any more rational than those three statements.

If you really still think C&T is even fiscally or environmentally valid, let alone ANYTHING short of purely greed-driven global wealth redistribution, please ... PLEASE ... read something ... ANYTHING ... about it not written by Michael Moore or Pee Wee Herman. And for God's, your country's, and the planet's sake see the documentary "Cool It" at the Regency Tamarac in Denver or read the book. I've spent literally hundreds of hours of my time studying this vital GW issue including C&T, including personal discussions with an investigative reporter and government atmospheric scientists in a live public debate; can't you at least spend two hours on it?

Or not; thank GOD it's a dead issue in the streets and in the halls of congress since the voters now see through it. And, I'm sorry to put it so bluntly, but anyone who still thinks C&T is still a valid OR honest attempt to save the ecology is simply ignorant. Not necessarily stupid; ignorant. Even the vast majority of our CONGRESSMEN know that now.

Was that the Palin op ed you were referring to? If so, she drove that nail home flush with one whack; whole books and thousands of hours of debate and testimony back up her little sound bite with reams of detail.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
coboardhead



Joined: 26 Oct 2009
Posts: 2036

PostPosted: Sat Nov 20, 2010 9:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Washington Post

I have not seen the NYT's Op Ed. I should read that.

Her comments regarding cap and trade in the op ed I have read, have been to just say Obama is wrong. Not an analysis or any suggestions besides drill baby drill to answer our energy problems.

I think our energy policy should be something beyond "tapping the resources God gave us". "Cap and Tax" . Empty sound bites.

BTW, you have no idea what my opinion of the "cap and trade" is. I have not discussed anything beyond a potential carbon tax. Along with a number of other taxes to spread out the pain of paying for our irresponsible spending. Even Alan Simpson agrees with me on that one.


Last edited by coboardhead on Sat Nov 20, 2010 9:27 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
feuser



Joined: 29 Oct 2002
Posts: 1398

PostPosted: Sat Nov 20, 2010 9:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

isobars wrote:
...What I see is a very confident, extremely articulate, well-grounded, thick-skinned, straight-shooting, intelligent, clear-headed, very popular, conservative woman ...


What I see is embarrassing:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0C0z2PZQCSc

_________________
florian - ny22

http://www.windsurfing.kasail.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
feuser



Joined: 29 Oct 2002
Posts: 1398

PostPosted: Sat Nov 20, 2010 9:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

isobars wrote:


That other sentence, if it refers to her Cap & Trade op ed in the NYT, really drives home the need for you to start watching some news and reading some books.
...
is that the Palin op ed you were referring to? If so, she drove that nail home flush with one whack; whole books and thousands of hours of debate and testimony back up her little sound bite with reams of detail.


Is that the op-ed YOU are referring to?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/13/AR2009071302852.html

Palin merely demonstrates that she has zero clue what cap and trade is, and whose idea it originally was.

If you do not want rely on a whacko creationist to explain climate science, and resulting public policy to you, read this instead:

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/Presence-of-Mind-Blue-Sky-Thinking.html?c=y&page=1

_________________
florian - ny22

http://www.windsurfing.kasail.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
coboardhead



Joined: 26 Oct 2009
Posts: 2036

PostPosted: Sat Nov 20, 2010 9:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Feuser:

Thanks for the link. I had forgotten the dialogue, even though, I was working for a power company designing power lines to use different power plants (and grades of coal) to reduce pollution at non peak times due to this policy.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
isobars



Joined: 12 Dec 1999
Posts: 14635

PostPosted: Sun Nov 21, 2010 10:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

coboardhead wrote:
1. Washington Post

2. Her comments regarding cap and trade in the op ed I have read, have been to just say Obama is wrong. Not an analysis or any suggestions besides drill baby drill to answer our energy problems.

3. BTW, you have no idea what my opinion of the "cap and trade" is.


1. You're right ... I had the right Palin article, wrong newspaper. I equate those two papers because of their juxtaposition on the political scale.

2. The article you cited includes at least 43 separately identifiable bullet facts (that's a lot of facts to pack into a short op ed piece; I know, because mine have been published very consistently in the cities I've lived near.) The few that even mention Obama are accurate. Your refusal to recognize her many explicit references to other energy sources and methods places you squarely in the far left, Palin-is-an-idiot camp despite your continued claims and implications of having an open mind.

I shall watch with great interest as the next two years fly by to see whether she starts issuing explicit, viable, fact-supported plans for the nation's and world's future, or just keeps spouting very effective but shallow motivational homilies from the podium. Now is not the time for the former; the minute she starts publishing detailed plans is the minute she is signaling an intent to run for the White House, if she's smart and IMO. It's far too early for that, and only time will tell whether she and her handlers are thinking the same way I am on this issue. The half-dozen or so very rational reasons she gave for leaving the Alaska White House coincided with my own assessment and with subsequent analyses by pundits I respect, so maybe she's dumb like a fox. We'll know in about a year (unless we observe only left wing news and/or refuse to see the facts she does publish).

If she does start producing insightful and detailed plans, I'll vote for her.
If she sticks with the homilies, I'll vote against Obama, because he scares the living dog crap out of me even despite my limited time remaining on this planet and my having no kids to face his frightening legacy.

3. On the contrary. Intentionally or not, your reference to her 43-fact editorial as "nothing more than political gibberish" tells us a great deal about your position on AGW and C&T.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
stevenbard



Joined: 11 Nov 1993
Posts: 4344

PostPosted: Sun Nov 21, 2010 11:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PTUY16CkS-k

This boils the current mess to a funny cartoon.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 3 of 5

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum

myiW | Weather | Community | Membership | Support | Log in
like us on facebook
© Copyright 1999-2007 WeatherFlow, Inc Contact Us Ad Marketplace

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group